An Endorsement,  Sort of

A month or two ago,  I issued my endorsement of Dr Howard Dean,  who is seeking to be the Democratic nominee for President.  I reiterate that endorsement,  and my qualifications about it.

I believe Dr Dean,  former Governor of Vermont, is well qualified to be President.  He acquitted himself reasonably well as Governor.  He was an early dissenter from President Bush's actions in Iraq,  and the Neo-conservative foreign policy.  Dr Dean is not a big spender,  believing in balanced budgets,  and would repeal the Bush tax cuts.  He comes from a rural state,  which doesn't have big city gun problems,  so he less sympathetic to those of us who want more gun control.  He is sympathetic to those with progressive social views;  e.g., on abortion and women's rights,  homosexual rights,  affirmative action and civil rights generally.

From my point of view,  the candidate who says the most things similar to what I think is NONE OF THE ABOVE.  Rep Dennis Kucinch is very attractive to me,  because he approves universal, nationalized medicine and many of the Great Society programs.  On the other hand,  he opposes NAFTA and globalization generally,  with which I disagree.  Ralph Nader,  who I admire greatly,  loses me in his opposition to nuclear power,  genetic engineering and a number of other environmental issues.  But, I could certainly vote for either of them without guilt,  as opposed to George W Bush and others of his ilk.

Previously,  I had indicated a facility to support  Sen John Kerry,  were he the Democratic nominee.  However, almost daily Sen Kerry has reduced my enthusiasm for him,  most lately by opposing "gay marriage."  Sen Kerry is opposed to Rep Gephardt's health care proposals;  in fact, he is opposed to any "big" proposal,  believing instead in small, incremental changes.  Sen Kerr's statements on Iraq, and foreign policy generally,  are like thick hominy grits,  a barely digestible mixture of hog and maize.  While the Senator's fare may please traditional Southern appetites,  it's not fare for Yankee sailors and factory workers.  I don't know what I'll do if Sen Kerry turns out to be the nominee.

I simply cannot support Sen Lieberman or Rep Gephardt. I don't think either of them can win against George Bush.  Rep Gephardt,  with Sen Daschle the author of last Fall's catastrophic election defeat,  has held a "safe" seat too long to trust his political judgement.  Sen Lieberman continues the "Bush Lite" policy, as if nothing at all had happened.  While either of these gentlemen might be marginally preferred to the sitting Administration,  I am not inclined to make gourmet distinctions about the flavor of borscht at the Inaugural Dinner.

I give short shrift to the other candidates,  as I believe none of them represent a serious - meaning, effective - challenge to the President.  I do think, however, Sen Graham (D-Fla) would be an excellent running mate for whoever is at the top of the ticket.

The Democratic objective is to send W. back to herding cattle somewhere along the Pecos or further.  This needs to be done with the best available electoral combination,  while at the same time preserving party principles and values.  I think a Dean-Graham ticket represents a near optimal selection.

Digging Out from Under

In the heat of Presidential campaigning,  most people are ignoring the unfortunate situation of the  Congressional campaign.

Without going into details,  it looks like most of the Congressional delegations will be returned;  almost all of them hold "safe" seats.  If HizHonor Tom Delay's scurrilous tactics work,  Republicans will not just hold, but increase,  their margins in the House.  The Republicans have the advantage in the Senate,  as most of the contested seats are held by incumbent Democrats.  Thus,  it appears the next Congress will be thoroughly dominated by Republicans;  maybe even a veto-proof Republican Senate.

If Rep Darrell Issa's dirty trick recall succeeds,  California will be subjected to a Republican coup d'etat.  This will force huge amounts of money to be spent in California defending Democratic incumbents,  such as Sen Boxer,  undermining the Presidential campaign.  While Republicans write off California in the Presidential race,  they will torture Democrats by forcing diversion of California money and energy away from national purposes.

Thus,  the November 2002 debacle continues to sap progressive strength.  Democrats had to win last Fall,  just to keep ahead of the disadvantageous 2004 scenario.  But,  the short term thinkers at DNC and DLC only worried about getting the Iraq issue off the table,  so they could win the election on Democratic terms.  We know what happened to that plan,  and things have only got worse ever since.

Democrats already face a Hobson's choice:  maybe elect a President or maybe hold their own in Congress,  or maybe get nothing at all.  Either way,  the deck is stacked in favor of  Republicans,  who own the house, hold the cards, and bankroll the bets.

Progressives need to think of something else;  it doesn't look like we're going to win at these games.

A Desperate Hope?

In her July 12, 2003 New York Times Op-Ed piece,  Maureen Dowd asks, "Why does it always come to this in Washington?"  While Ms Dowd was talking about the recent Washington scandals over the missing WMD, Presidential "misrepresentations" and so on,  her question is worth considering.

Why is it the "far-right" Mr Bush concedes anything to the "far-left" Mr Kennedy on school programs ("No Child Left Behind") and prescription drugs for seniors?  Could it be that even the powerful Republican warlords have to throw crumbs to the starving crowd?  Are the Neo-Con Ninjas incapable of defending themselves once the cloak of darkness is lifted?

The question is well worth considering fully:  why does it always come to this?  How does Washington really work?  What are the forces that motivate the players,  and how can these be changed?  How do the players and the script interact to keep the whole show on track,  almost without regard of either.

"The play's the thing/ wherein I'll capture the conscience of the King." (Hamlet)

July 13, 2003

Last update: 11/02/2007

© Copyright California Expert Software 2007

All rights reserved.